Blame the shooter, not the gun

I highly doubt 1 hero with a gun could have saved anything, he would probably panic with the rest of them due to the gas and would run to save his
life, not stand and fight a guy with bullet proof armor and heavy weaponry. Its all talks in order to support.

The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

Seriously, is there ever any cause to require a 100 round drum, or a 40 round clip?
How about paramilitary AR-15 style weapons?
What are these used for anyway?
Certainly not for hunting or home defense.
If you need that many rounds for either of these things, you need to spend more time on the range practicing.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.

^^^ This!!!

The only reason it's legal is because the gun lobby pays off those sock puppet politicians. Rationally, there's no reason to permit anyone having
those guns outside the police force, military, and maybe (!!) gun ranges for enthusiasts.

Unfortunately, there is no shortage of unsuspecting innocent civilians for lunatics like this Holmes guy to target. This guy was a coward, and it goes
to show why he was dressed in body armor. He was for some reason concerned with his own welfare while slaughtering innocents. I wonder what was going
through his mind? He seemingly didn't try to escape and was arrested within incident...hard to explain.

I own a good number (will not disclose) of assorted shells, rifle and handgun cartridges. I am an avid hunter, and range shooter as are many of my
friends and neighbors here in my area of the US. I am a member of a local range, although becoming a member of that range did NOT require a background
check, only a simple fee paid to the department of natural resources. I have participated/taught many firearm safety classes. I assure you that I am
an upstanding member of society with an impeccable record, having been subjected to several background checks and even holding a government issued
security clearance.

So, I ask you, should I have a "federal flag" on my name for having numerous guns and ammunitions strictly to support my hobby? I also know several
people that reload their own ammunition and ammunition for others that enjoy the same hobby, 6000 rounds is nothing to these individuals, are they
evil-doers?

I also assure you that most items that could be used to create explosives can definitely be found, not only online, but in your local hardware stores,
and especially farming supply stores.

People seem to be ignoring the fact that he rigged his home with explosives and then set a timer to turn on loud anoying music after he left. He was
trying to draw attention and cause a second massacare in his apartment building. Gun laws would not have stopped this guy. If it wasn't a gun he
would have just used a car bomb or something of that nature.

“Gun control? It's the best thing you can do for crooks and gangsters. I want you to have nothing. If I'm a bad guy, I'm always gonna have a gun.
Safety locks? You will pull the trigger with a lock on, and I'll pull the trigger. We'll see who wins.”

The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

Seriously, is there ever any cause to require a 100 round drum, or a 40 round clip?
How about paramilitary AR-15 style weapons?
What are these used for anyway?
Certainly not for hunting or home defense.
If you need that many rounds for either of these things, you need to spend more time on the range practicing.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.

Its called a magazine not a clip.

What is a paramilitary style weapon?

Semi automatic AR 15s are technologically no different than semi-auto hunting rifles. The difference is cosmetic.

What, in history, proves the concept of prohibition? Since when does banning stuff solve problems

I highly doubt 1 hero with a gun could have saved anything, he would probably panic with the rest of them due to the gas and would run to save his
life, not stand and fight a guy with bullet proof armor and heavy weaponry. Its all talks in order to support.

Originally posted by muse7
Once again the main culprit in the aurora shootings, virginia tech and columbine was the easy availability of guns to enable these lunatics to go on
their rampage.

edit on 7/22/2012 by muse7 because: (no reason given)

if you really care about "victims" you would be leading a modern day temperance campaign- the number of men, women and kids who suffer at the hands
of alcohol- be it rape, violence, murder, broken homes, neglect etc dwarfs anything that guns in the hands of a wrong un can conjure.

I cannot disagree more. I don't see the logic in throwing the baby out with the bathwater. There will always be bad apples. Unnecessary death will
always be horrible, and we will always try and cope and find ways to prevent it. But, it is futile. There are those that will always find a way. And
yes, guns do make killing easy. But, that doesn't make it okay to take them away from everyone, or make it extremely difficult to own them. We all
have a right to defend ourselves in any way that we see fit. Some people may think it is unnecessary to own a firearm, while others enjoy owning a
small arsenal. This is America, and because I fear for my family, and I fear that someone may threaten them, I have the right to prepare for their
defense. I choose to prepare for unlikely situations. I would much rather have a gun and never need it, then to need it and not have it.

So tell me Phenom, what have you got planned to stop the US Government from taking the last of your remaining freedoms before they enact any Gun
Restriction laws then???

This type of thinking proves the point I made earlier to Projectvxn. Cheers

I don't think we can STOP them from doing anything. It's clear that they (government) are going to do what they want despite our constitutional
rights. It is also clear that they are NOT the government that our forefather's had placed here nor had in mind for our country. It IS clear that our
country (America) has been hijacked for quite some years by the very entity that we won our freedoms from.

My point in making this particular post wasn't a suggestion to stop anything from happening, rather to refute those that I know will come posting how
great of an idea it is for gun control to happen. Basically this is a preemptive strike on those who agree with the government taking our guns away as
a justification for the events that just happened in Colorado (The Batman slaughter).

To answer your question though. I don't personally own a gun, but if I did, no matter what law they pass, I would not turn my gun in or register it
because my constitution says I have the right to own it and to protect myself and my family with it. If they (this rogue government) wants to pass
whatever law against the will of the people, I take the same stance as Bush on that one "Don't wave those damn law papers in my face, they're
nothing but damn pieces of paper". This is how they think of our constitution....so this is what I think of THEIR despotic, constitutionally
offensive laws. Who cares what they say or what laws they make....they are going to oppress and beat you and lock you in a FEMA prison eventually
anyway, so just keep your weapons and tell no one about them and when they kick in your door without a warrant.....they will then know if you have a
weapon or not.

The constitution is the law of the land, and if Bush or Obama passes illegal laws (which they have) by bypassing Congress and invalidating it's power
to a mere ceremonial stature...claiming that they only report to the UN, then they can worship who they will. It doesn't mean that the American
people have to though.

Our laws are constructed under the constitution before these monsters defiled it. As far as I am concerned the original constitution still stands and
THEIR laws which have abrogated the sovereignty of our great nation and the base laws created by our forefathers, therefore, because their laws were
created in opposition to the will of the people and passed behind the back of congress, are null and void.

The only real power they have is police, military, IRS and Federal Reserve intimidation and if we play by their rules....not only will the
intimidation graduate to more tyranny but it will encompass every facet of our lives and we all will wish we were dead instead. Many have and will die
anyway for no reason at all other than simply because they felt like killing us or in the name of power, experimentation or depopulation.

My answer in summary is this:
They will do what they have always done and our wants and needs are not an issue nor a factor in their tyrannical plans. We must simply resist and
stick to the laws that our forefathers created for us and ignore their laws. Yes many will die...but more will die if we let them have total control
and keep doing what they are doing.

Right now our future is either bleak or (giving them total control) ...more bleak, we have no hope for a better future as there is not enough time for
us to witness the fruition of our labor but we can certainly stand and fight for our children and their futures, we have to resist.....every one of
us.
Although, the likelihood of this collaboration or patriotism is unlikely.

This particular post though, was a prognosticated retort to the "true believers" of the governments amicability towards civilians regarding gun
control, as I know they will be here soon, whether paid for or just ignorant.

I forget the exact quote but "those who would give up rights for protection are fools and deserve neither". People like Holmes will always exist.
But so will decent folk who would risk their life to stop him. Trust in the fact that the overwhelming majority of gun owners are decent folk.

Without guns he surely would have just used his ability to manufacture explosive devices to cause even more fatalities. Banning guns doesn't stop
evil.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.